Loading...
2007 05 08 PCCe�O ;�i(�U / Q.�i 4 Qum& Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-guinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California MAY 8, 2007 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2007-018 Beginning Minute Motion 2007-008 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Flag Salute B. Pledge of Allegiance C. Roll Call IL PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 24, 2007. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7'AgendaW.doc a�nnemrnn�r�nmmi V. PUBLIC HEARING: For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request.to Speak" form must be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public hearing. A. Item ................ CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006- 562, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-107, ZONE CHANGE 2006-127, SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002, AMENDMENT #6, TENTATIVE TRACT 32266, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-852, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2006-011 Applicant:........ Pacific Santa Fe Corporation/Crowne Pointe Partners, LLC Location........... Located within the PGA West development, bounded on the north and east by the PGA West Stadium Course, and on the south and west by PGA Boulevard Request ........... Consideration of the following application requests: 1. Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration; 2. Amend the General Plan Land Use Element, from Tourist Commercial (TC) to Resort Mixed Use (RMU); 3. Change the Official Zoning Map, from Tourist Commercial (CT) to Tourist Commercial/Residential Specific Plan (CT/RSP); 4. Update the overall PGA West Specific Plan to implement development principles and guidelines for a 292-unit resort condominium project, with clubhouse building, common pools and lighted tennis courts, on ±42 acres; 5. The division of ±42 acres into 97 residential lots, a 1.35 acre community center lot, and other common area lots; 6. A site plan and building design approval for 292 one, two and ' three-story condominium units, a 7,122 s.f. recreation building with a 32 x 70-foot common pool and 43-foot 6-inch clock tower feature, and a private entry gatehouse; and 7. Consideration of an Agreement to implement a funding mechanism ensuring payment to the City of certain fees to financially offset the conversion of the original hotel/resort site to residential, for the anticipated potential for loss of revenue(s) associated with development of the Eden Rock project. Action .............. Request to table G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc B. Item ................ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007-103 Applicant......... Cham T. Prince Location........... 79-430 Highway 111; northwest corner of Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road within the La Quinta Valley Plaza Request ........... Consideration of a Cosmetology School within an existing commercial space. Action .............. Resolution 2007- C. Item ................ CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006- 578, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-109, AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2006-086 Applicant......... City of La Quinta Location........... Southeast portion of the City, south of Avenue 52 Request ........... Consideration of a Negative Declaration of environmental impact and General Plan Amendment and Zone Text Amendment to establish policies and standards for the development of tentative tract maps on parcels of ten acres or less in the southeastern portion of the City. Action .............. Resolution 2007- VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None Vill COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Review of City Council meeting of May 1, 2007 IX. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on May 22, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. PAReports - PC=07\5-08-07\Agenda.doc DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, May 8, 2007, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, on Friday, May 4, 2007. 11 DATED: May 4, 2007 Exe�tive Secretary City Quinta, California. Public Notices The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7123, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. If special electronic, equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required. If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00 p.m. meeting. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City, Hall. 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA . April 24, 2007 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by, Chairman Paul Quill who asked Mr. Jerry Herman to lead the flag salute B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Katie Barrows, Rick Daniels, Jim Engle and Chairman Paul Quill. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Public Works Director Tim Jonasson, Planning Manager Les Johnson, Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: Mr. Jack Berkwinn, 43-618 Selarno, stated he had attended a meeting put on by the Mayer Corporation for their project proposed at the northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive. The concerns they have is whether or not anything can be done to have a different market at this location than the proposed Wal-Mart. Community Development Director Doug Evans explained a neighborhood meeting was held last night regarding a project proposed for the northeast corner of Fred Waring Drive and Washington Street. This project is currently being reviewed by the Community Development Department and will be before the Commission at a future public hearing. The applicant was directed to hold a neighborhood meeting and it was staff's understanding the meeting was well attended and well received. Chairman Quill informed Mr. Berkwinn that when the project is before the Commission the neighboring communities will have the opportunity to, speak regarding the project at that time. A notice will be mailed to everyone within 500 feet of the project notifying them of the date and time of the hearing. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Quill asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of April 10, 2007. Chairman Quill asked that Page 4, Item 13 be amended to read, "As the east side of Madison Street between Avenue 58 and Avenue 60..."; Page 5, Item 18.b. add, "...corner landscaping reduced to rn CKIARAM k., r.%IuDMnrCIDr ne:...... %1An7%A on m a..,n Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2007 50% turf..."; Page 9, B. more detail should be added as to what was discussed regarding the Green Build items, and add that the Commission directed staff to agendize a discussion regarding the trail along Avenue 58. There being no further changes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Barrows to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 2006-562, General Plan Amendment 2006- 107 Zone Change 2006-127 Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #6, Tentative Tract Map 32266 Site Development Permit 2006-852, and Development Agreement 2006-011; a request of Pacific Santa Fe Corporation/Crowne Pointe Partners, LLC, for consideration of the following application requests: recommend adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration; an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element, from Tourist Commercial (TC) to Resort Mixed Use (RMU); change the Official Zoning Map, from Tourist Commercial (CT) to Tourist Commercial/Residential Specific Plan (CT/RSP); update the overall PGA West Specific Plan to implement development principles and guidelines for a 292-unit resort condominium project, with clubhouse building, common pools and lighted tennis courts, on ±42 acres; the division of ±42 acres into 97 residential lots, a 1.35 acre community center lot, and other common area lots; a site plan and building design approval for 292 one, two and three-story condominium units, a 7,122 s.f. recreation building with a 32 x 70-foot common pool and 43-foot 6-inch clock tower feature, and a private entry gatehouse; and consideration of an Agreement to implement a funding mechanism ensuring payment to the City of certain fees to financially offset the conversion of the original hotel/resort site to residential, for the anticipated potential for lost revenue(s) associated with development of the Eden Rock project for the property located within the PGA West development, bounded on the north' and east by the PGA West Stadium Course and Clubhouse and on the south and west by PGA Boulevard. 1. Commissioner Daniels excused himself due to a potential conflict ` of interest and left the dais. 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Alderson to continue the project to May 8, 2007. Staff asked that the Chairman open the public hearing before a motion is made to continue the project. Commissioners Barrows/Alderson rescinded their motion. r. •��n,onnrc�or nn:... �..,..�onM(n 2 vn n1 Ann Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2007 3. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Staff explained additional environmental review was needed and requested a continuance to the May 8th Commission meeting. 4. 'There being no public comment, Chairman Quill asked if there was a motion to continue the project. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Alderson to continue the project to May 8, 2007. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Daniels rejoined the Commission. B. Site Development Permit 2006-872; a request of Trans West Housing, Inc. for, consideration of architecture and landscaping plans for a proposed 21,204 square foot clubhouse, entry gate, and recreational parcel for the property located within proposed Tentative Tract Maps 32879 and 34642, south of Avenue 54, east of Madison Street, west of Monroe Street, and north of the Greg Norman Course. 1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Alderson asked if the 37-foot architectural feature was allowed. Staff stated it is allowed. 3. Commissioner Daniels asked about the water feature. Staff explained the water feature serves multiple purposes. Commissioner Daniels asked the footprint of the water feature. Staff asked that the applicant answer the question. 4. Commissioner Barrows asked if the multi -use trail was located along Monroe Street. Staff stated yes. 5. Commissioner Daniels asked how this clubhouse plan compared to the previous plan. Staff stated the original design did have a hitching rail and horse amenities. 6. There being no further questions of staff Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Jerry Herman, representing Trans West Housing, stated they were nd Ulpnnl`C\D(` �Ilv. .nn\onn�\n 3 9n n9 A.... Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2007 available to answer questions. He explained the location and purpose of the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) water line in relation to the water usage at the Saddle Club. 7. Commissioner Barrows asked the applicant to show where the BOR line would run and how it would work. Mr. Herman stated it `will be a storage facility as well as a source of irrigation for the Saddle Club pastures as well as neighboring property. 8. Commissioner Alderson asked if the water level would be low enough to work as a retention basin. Mr. Herman stated yes. 9. Chairman Quill asked the applicant to explain the irrigation system. Mr. Chuck Shephardson, landscape architect, stated the water is brought in from the BOR line and pressurized. It will fluctuate during irrigation periods. The only time it will overflow is during a major flood and they can open the gates to flood irrigate the pastures to eliminate the overflow during that time. Chairman Quill asked why it was not being used to irrigate anything other than the Saddle Club. Ms. Marty Butler explained the pastures do not belong to the Saddle Club, but to the property owner to the north and they are leasing the pastures from them. Mr. Shephardson stated they could look into increasing the use of the water to the perimeter landscaping. 10. Commissioner Barrows asked if the landscaping at the secondary entry could have the size of the turf reduced significantly. Mr. Shephardson explained all the turf on the north side of the street and significantly reduce the other side as well. He stated it could be reduced as long as they retain the continuity with the other entries of the Ranch. 1 1 . Chairman Quill asked how the turf behind the walls at the entry will be seen. Mr. Shephardson explained the stone walls are uneven and will have an appearance of being broken down. They will dip down to allow visual windows to.the pasture. The area has been overseeded currently with Bermuda grass and in the winter tall Fescue and Rye grass will be planted to make it look like a pasture. 12. Commissioner Barrows asked the purpose of the pasture area. Mr. Shephardson stated it would be a day use area. Commissioner Barrows asked if the grass would have a trampled look. Mr. 4 Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2007 Shephardson stated pasture. it would have an appearance of being a 13. There being no further questions of staff, the applicant or any other public comment, Chairman Quill closed the public participation portion of the hearing. 14. Commissioner Barrows asked if Condition No. 48 would apply to the front entry. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Barrows asked that the turf area be reduced by 50%. 15. Chairman Quill stated it was important to point out there are specific differences between this project and the one reviewed at the last meeting where they denied the applicant's water feature. They are: 1) This is a lake that is adjacent to homes within the view corridor of the existing homes; 2) It has a walking path which ,has recreational uses for the homeowners; 3) it will be fed from a BOR line so it is not using potable water from a water meter that is a well water meter; 4) it will probably have fish which also provides recreational uses; and 5) it serves as a reservoir lake for irrigate purposes as there will be a pump station to provide pressurized water from the BOR line to specific irrigation sources at the Saddle Club as well as other potential area. 16. Commissioner Barrows asked that the turf on the north side of the water feature also be reduced. 17. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007-017 approving Site Development Permit 2006- 872, as recommended and modified: a. Condition 48: Turf area shall be reduced by 50% at the main entry. b. Condition added: the turf area on the outer perimeter of the water feature would be reduced. C. Environmental Assessment 2006-578, General Plan Amendment 2006- 109, and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2006-086; a request of the City for consideration of a Negative Declaration of environmental impact and General Plan Amendment and Zone Text Amendment to establish policies and standards for the development of tentative tract maps on parcels of ten acres or less in the southeastern portion of the City. (]dlNDnnICIOI 5 Planning Commission Minutes April 24, 2007 1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Les Johnson explained the request to continue the application to May 8, 2007. 2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to continue the applications to May 8, 2007. Unanimously approved BUSINESS ITEMS: None. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Staff gave a review of the City Council meeting of April 17, 2007. B. Commissioner Barrows asked that more background be included in the staff reports in regard to water features special to their use and source. C. Community Development Director Doug Evans informed the Commission that the applicant, Mr. Hughes, for Tentative Tract Map 33597 appealed the Commission's decision. Staff expects the Council to provide staff with direction in regard to water features. D. Commissioner Barrows asked about the timeline for the Commission to review the CVWD water requirements. Staff stated they would prepare a timeline and bring it back to the Commission. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Daniels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting to be held on May 8, 2007. This regular meeting was adjourned at 7:51 p.m. on April 24, 2007. Respectfully submitted, Betty Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California 6 PUBLIC HEARING #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 8, 2007 CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-562 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-107 ,ZONE CHANGE 2006-127 SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002, AMENDMENT #6 TENTATIVE TRACT 32266 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-852 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2006-011 REQUEST: STAFF REQUEST TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE LISTED APPLICATION REQUESTS FOR A RECOMMENDATION ON DISPOSITION OF THE EDEN ROCK AT PGA WEST PROJECT LOCATION: LOCATED WITHIN THE PGA WEST DEVELOPMENT, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH AND EAST BY THE PGA WEST STADIUM COURSE AND CLUBHOUSE, AND ON THE SOUTH AND WEST BY PGA BOULEVARD (ATTACHMENT 1) APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: PACIFIC SANTA FE CORPORATION / CROWNE POINTE PARTNERS, LLC. BACKGROUND This item was continued to this meeting by the Planning Commission at the April 24, 2007 regular meeting. Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission table consideration of the Eden Rock project, for re -noticing and consideration at a date to be determined. This action is necessary due to procedural changes relevant to the environmental review process. Based on the requirements for additional new traffic data to be generated, and concerns within the overall PGA West community, the applicant has chosen to prepare an EIR on the project to ensure that all pertinent issues are addressed, and that the community issues can be further identified. It is anticipated that the EIR process will take between 4 and 5 months to complete, and,that the project would be presented to the Planning Commission in September or October. There are several residents with concerns on this project, who may wish to speak on this project at the meeting. As the public hearing is open at the present time, and given the fact that this will be the last opportunity for these residents to present their viewpoints before end of season, it is recommended that the Planning Commission take testimony prior to tabling this item. Staff will not be making a presentation on the project at this time, but will of course be available to answer any questions the Planning Commission and residents may have. RECOMMENDATION 1. That the Planning Commission receive testimony during the open public hearing, and; 2. Move to table consideration of Environmental Assessment 2006-562, and associated applications, to be re -scheduled for a future date. Prepared by: Wallace Nesbit, Principal Planner PUBLIC HEARING #B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 8, 2007 CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007-103 APPLICANT: CHAM T. PRINCE PROPERTY OWNER: ANN MICHELLE, LLC (NEIL KLEINE) REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A COSMETOLOGY SCHOOL WITHIN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL SPACE LOCATION: 79-430 HIGHWAY 111; NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND DUNE PALMS ROAD (LA QUINTA VALLEY PLAZA) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT .(CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 (LEASING OF EXISTING PRIVATE FACILITIES) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RC (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) ZONING: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: CORPORATE CENTER DRIVE SOUTH: LA QUINTA VALLEY PLAZA; HIGHWAY 111 EAST: LA QUINTA VALLEY PLAZA; DUNE PALMS ROAD WEST: VACANT, UNENTITLED COMMERCIAL LAND BACKGROUND: The Coachella Valley Beauty College is currently located at 47-120 Dune Palms Road, Suite D, within the Dune Palms Plaza. The college offers a number of cosmetology -related classes, including hairdressing, skin care, and makeup. As required by La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.80.040 Table of Permitted Uses, a vocational school in a Regional Commercial zone requires a Conditional Use Permit, which was approved for this location on May 27, 2003 (CUP 2003-075). The college has since outgrown its Dune Palms Plaza location, and is looking to relocate to the La Quinta Valley Plaza, which consists of seven multi -tenant retail/office buildings, located on the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road (SDP 2003-761) (Attachment 1). The La Quinta Valley Plaza is part of the approved La Quinta Corporate Center Specific Plan, which encompasses much of the commercially -zoned area north of Highway 111 between Dune Palms Road and Adams Street (SP 1999-036). RFC1l1FST- The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of the Coachella Valley Beauty College within a 10,000 square foot tenant space in the northernmost building of the La Quinta Valley Plaza (Attachment 2). The school would include a reception area, three classrooms, thirty practice stations, five sinks, and other ancillary space requirements (restrooms, storage space, etc.) (Attachment 3). The school is also proposed to be used as a barbershop and beauty/nail salon. Daytime class schedules typically run Tuesdays through Saturdays from 8:30am to 1:30pm and 1:30pm to 5:OOpm. Evening class sessions are held from 4:OOpm to 9:OOpm, Mondays through Thursdays. Each class session will include a maximum of 15 students and 4 instructors, which results in a total of no more than 20 people at the school at one time, excluding customers. Each student is assigned to his/her own practice station during each class session, and if customers of the barbershop/salon are present, the students are to practice on the customers only at their assigned station, and only during their scheduled class session. The barbershop/salon use will only be offered in the morning and afternoon class sessions, and not the evening. Therefore, the maximum number of people at the school at one time could be 35, including 20 students/instructors and up to 15 customers. Existing parking on -site will be utilized. ANALYSIS: The Coachella Valley Beauty College is proposing to relocate to a larger central location along the La Quinta Highway 111 commercial corridor, and having been at its current location on Dune Palms Road for over three years without any significant issues, staff expects the beauty college to be complementary to the other nearby uses. Because the proposed school building is located in a relatively isolated location, and is set back an adequate distance from Highway 1 1 1, there should be minimal visual and traffic -related impact as only students and customers are expected to know of the school's location, and the use is not dependent on exposure to the highway. Additionally, at 10,000 square feet, the school utilizes over 60% of the building, and the applicant has stated that they also plan on using the remainder of the building as a possible beauty salon, thereby limiting the entire site to beauty/salon-related uses. The proposed use is consistent with the land use designation of Regional Commercial for the proposed location, as well as the permitted land uses stated in the approved Specific Plan for the La Quinta Corporate Center. Use of the space as a cosmetology school and barbershop/salon will have similar characteristics and impacts as standalone beauty salons, barber shops, professional offices, and similar uses, which are permitted by right within the Regional Commercial zoning district. The schedule of classes and the limited number of students and customers is expected to have minimal impact on most of the other neighboring businesses. Some businesses, restaurants in particular, could likely benefit from the increased number of visitors to the commercial plaza. Within the La Quinta Valley Plaza, an ample amount of parking spaces exist to accommodate the students, teachers, and customers of the college, while also leaving sufficient parking for the other neighboring businesses. LQMC Section 9.150.060 Spaces Required by Use requires that trade schools, business colleges, and commercial schools provide 20 parking spaces per classroom. With three classrooms located within the school, the parking requirement would be 60 spaces, which staff finds unnecessary for a school that will have a maximum of 35 people on -site at any given time. Customer visits are infrequent, resulting in a minimal impact on the number of available parking spaces. Staff anticipates that the parking lot, although currently underutilized, at full capacity will able to provide enough parking spaces for students and all other surrounding uses. Public Notice This request was published in The Desert Sun newspaper on April 27, 2007, and mailed to all affected property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the proposed Coachella Valley Beauty College site as required by Section 9.200.110 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Public Agency Review Staff did not identify any public agencies that the applicant's request might affect. The use determination and conditions to be applied are at the sole discretion of the City of La Quinta. Findings to approve this request per Section 9.210.020.F of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007- approving Conditional Use Permit 2007-103, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Prepared by: / Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Coachella Valley Beauty College Site Plan. 3. Floor Plan (Rough Diagram) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A COSMETOLOGY SCHOOL WITHIN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL SPACE AT 79-430 HIGHWAY 111 CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007-103 APPLICANT: CHAM T. PRINCE WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 81h day of May, 2007, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request by Chem T. Prince for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of a cosmetology school within a t 10,000 square -foot commercial space located within the La Quinta Valley Plaza at 79-430 Highway 111, near the northwest corner of Dune Palms Road and Highway 111 and more particularly described as, APN: 649-820-005 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit application has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Department has determined that the proposed Conditional Use Permit is exempt from CEQA review under Guidelines Section 15301 (Leasing of Existing Private Facilities); and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of said Conditional Use Permit: 1. The proposed use is consistent with the land use designation of Regional Commercial. The City's General Plan Policies relating to Regional Commercial encourage a wide range of commercial opportunities and support services. 2. The proposed use is consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Zoning Code. Use of the space as a cosmetology school will have similar characteristics and impacts as beauty salons, barber shops, professional offices, and similar uses which are permitted by right under the Regional Commercial zoning district. 3. Processing of this Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use is in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that the request is exempt from CEQA under Guideline Section 15301 (Leasing of Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Conditional Use Permit 2007-103 Coachella Valley Beauty College May 8, 2007 Existing Private Facilities). As a result, no environmental review is required. 4. Approval of this proposed use will not be a detriment to the public health, safety and general welfare, nor shall it be injurious or incompatible with other properties or uses in the vicinity. Use of the space as a cosmetology school will have similar characteristics and impacts as neighboring land uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the Findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2007-103 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this the 81h day of May, 2007 by the following vote, to wit: . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007-103 COACHELLA VALLEY BEAUTY COLLEGE MAY 8, 2007 1. By operating this beauty college, the applicant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Conditional Use. Permit. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel at its sole discretion. The City of La Quinta shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). 3. The number of student practice stations within the beauty college shall be limited to thirty (30) spaces. 4. The beauty college owner shall ensure that adequate outdoor trash and other facilities are provided. 5. The City of La Quinta reserves the right to review and monitor the operation of this facility and modify Conditions of Approval regarding hours of operation, occupancy, and other operational conditions. 6. Any expansion of this use or substantial modifications to the approved floor plan may require an amendment of this Conditional Use Permit. Minor modifications to this Conditional Use Permit may be approved by the Community Development Director, provided notification of existing tenants may be required prior to such approval. ATTACHMENT 1 MILES AVE H F.. N U) ca z o c a w LL U. W 0 cn J a w z D 0 N 48TH AVE DUNE PALMS ROAD r<rm%j DDDrm r p1 '63r13 Z.<Z< * o m -1 -NI DAD - nN DD z J i\ SITE PLAN - ® ROBERT A. PIICHFORD lD00� A A TENANT IMPROVEMENT FOR: C v. BEAUTY COLLEGE ® DESIGN A N D DRAFTING N LA U1 LA QVIAY,CAL AL NiA, fFORNIA ��� L DUNE PALMS ROAD BIH L To B )B-HO HWY III 'lBM <O NWY fll 0 T c� � SIIE VLIN ® A08EAI I. PII(HFONN _ a rervarvr rnvao rereNr rae� c.V. eeAIIvc, uIGE ® 0[Sltx INN NRNf tIX6 a oo�m ,s� <ul=aauu I31NHOVi-L d PUBLIC HEARING #C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 8, 2007 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-578 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-109 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2006-086 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT TO ESTABLISH POLICIES AND STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS ON PARCELS OF TEN ACRES OR LESS IN THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE CITY LOCATION: SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE CITY, SOUTH OF AVENUE 52 PROPERTY OWNER: GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: NOT APPLICABLE VARIES; LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED THIS PROJECT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-578. BASED ON THIS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS PROPOSED. SURROUNDING . LAND USES: GENERALLY, THIS AREA OF THE CITY IS DEVELOPED IN SINGLE-FAMILY . TRACTS AND COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPMENTS OF VARYING SIZES BACKGROUND: A majority of the recent single-family development proposed in the southern section of La Quinta have been primarily small projects on "infill lots." These subdivisions have maximized density often at the cost of better circulation and access, overall design, open space and recreational amenities. A limited number of undeveloped or unentitled parcels remain in the southeastern section of the City with most being ten acres or less (Attachment 1). The general boundary for this area is south of Avenue 52 and generally west of Monroe Street. The item was discussed both at a joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting in 2006, and at the June 6, 2006 City Council meeting (Attachment 2). At that time, Council directed staff to develop policies and standards that addresses the subdivision of property that is 10 acres or less. In response to this, staff has developed amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code which would provide clear direction for the development of these smaller parcels, that ultimately either results in the creation of larger lots or consolidation of properties to an acreage size that can lead to a better design and the inclusion of amenities and/or open space. The public hearing for this item was opened at the April 24 Planning Commission and; at the request of staff, was continued to the May 8 meeting in order to allow staff additional time to further consider the proposed amendment language and expand notification to include all property owners of parcels ten acres or less located within the subject area. PROPOSAL: The proposed text amendments will consist of two components; a General Plan amendment and a Zone Change. Both proposals are as follows: General Plan Amendment First, a General Plan Text Amendment which will add the following to the General Plan: Residential Goals Policies, and Programs (Page 20 of the General Plan): Add under Policy 2 Program 2.2: The City shall establish development standards that ensure small residential development projects (less than 10 acres in size) include land use patterns, infrastructure, amenities and features consistent with larger projects. Program 2.3: On lands south of Avenue 52 within the City's limits, consider the possibility of reducing density and/or increasing lot sizes on development projects less than 10 acres in size in an effort to encourage compatible development with the more rural lands east of the City. Zone Change In order to implement the new Programs 2.2 and 2.3, the following text amendments would be required to the Zoning Ordinance. Section 9.30.030 would be amended to read: 9.30.030 RL Low Density Residential District. A. Purpose. To provide for the development and preservation of low density neighborhoods (two to four units per acre) with one- and two-story single-family detached dwellingson large or medium size lots and/or, subject to a specific plan, projects with clustered smaller dwellings, such as one- and two-story single-family attached, townhome or condominium dwellings, with generous open space. B. Permitted Uses. Chapter 9.40 lists permitted land uses. C. Development Standards. Minimum lot size 7200 sq. ft.' Minimum lot frontage 60 ft. Maximum structure height 28 ft. Maximum number of stories 2 Minimum front yard setback (non -garage portions of dwelling) 20 ft.Z Minimum garage setback 25 ft.3 Minimum interior/exterior side yard setbacks 5/10 ft.4 Minimum rear yard setback 10 ft. for existing recorded lots and 25 ft. for new lots Maximum lot coverage 50% Minimum livable floor area excluding garage 1400 sq. ft. Minimum landscape setbacks adjacent to perimeter streets 10' minimum at any point, 20' minimum average over entire frontage - 'A minimum lot size of 20,000 sq. ft. or larger shall be required of new lots created within subdivisions 10 acres or less in size as further described in Section 9.50.100. z Projects with five or more adjacent dwelling units facing the same street shall. incorporate front setbacks varying between 20 feet and 25 feet plus in order, to avoid streetscape monotony. 3 Twenty feet if "roll -up" type garage door is used. ° For interior setbacks, if the building is over 17 feet in height, the setback is five feet plus one foot for every foot over 17 feet in height or fraction thereof, to a maximum setback of ten feet. The additional setback may be provided entirely at grade level or a combination of at grade and airspace above the 17-foot building. Section 9.50.100 would be added and read as follows: 9.50.100.1 RL district property subdivision development standards, ten acres or less, located south of Avenue 52, and shall be designated on the Official Zoning Map as "Southeast Policy Area Overlay." A. Applicability. The following development standards shall apply to all subdivisions 10 acres or less in size located in the RL district, south of Avenue 52, and west of Monroe Street. B. Development Standards. 1. A minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet shall be required, unless: a. The proposed subdivision establishes a minimum of 25% common area open space (exclusive of individual residential lots). Said open space shall include amenities and features such as passive open space, trails, play areas or equipment, picnic facilities, recreational amenities, clubhouse facilities and/or active use parks. Retention basins may be considered as part of the 25% open space requirement provided they are designed as an integral part of the project, fully landscaped, and accessible for passive and/or active use; and b. The minimum lot size and lot width within the proposed subdivision should be equal to or greater than the minimum lot size and lot width of the residential lots within the abutting subdivided properties created prior to (effective date of ordinance); and c. Driveway access should be consolidated with other neighboring undeveloped properties. 2. Under no circumstances shall lots be less than 7,200 square feet in size. 3. A landscaped parkway of 30 feet in depth shall be required on all public streets. 4. All other development standards of the RL District, including, but not limited to setbacks, building height and parking requirements, shall apply. C. Official Zoning Map. The City's Official Zoning Map shall identify as an overlay all properties potentially affected by these provisions. ANALYSIS: The General Plan includes the following Goals, Policies and Programs that are directly applicable to the proposed amendments: ■ General Land Use Goals, Policies & Programs (Page 19) GOAL 2: High quality development which promotes the City's image as "The Gem of the Desert" Program 2.2: The Development Code shall include design standards in all zoning districts which assure high quality development. • Residential Goals, Policies, and Programs (Page 20) GOAL 2: A broad range of housing types and choices for all residents of the City. Policy 1 - The City shall encourage the preservation of neighborhood character and assure a consistent and compatible residential land use pattern. Program 1.2: Apply the City's discretionary powers and site development review process consistently to assure that subdivision and development plans are compatible with existing residential areas. Policy 2 Encourage compatible development adjacent to existing neighborhoods and infrastructure. Policy 3 - The City shall discourage scattered development of residential subdivisions by requiring necessary improvement/extension of intervening roadways and infrastructure to serve new developments. The intent of the General Plan was clearly to encourage the development of high quality residential projects within the City. As larger parcels have been developed, it has been easier ,to implement good design, because the larger parcels have enough room to accommodate open space areas, setbacks and single access points. As often happens, the remaining parcels in this area are smaller, and often are long and narrow, making their development more complicated. Of particular concern is the need to provide access to multiple lots created from a two and a half, five or ten acre parcel. As the Planning Commission may recall, these parcels often propose single cul-de-sac streets which significantly impact the amount of land available for lots, open space and landscaping. If two of these parcels, for example, were to share an access cul-de-sac, both parcels would have more room to include open space areas, parkways and other features. The proposed amendments will create development standards which will provide for open space and amenities within projects as well as provide added landscaping on the major roadways on which these smaller lots are located. These provisions may also encourage neighboring property owners to consolidate their development efforts. The proposed amendments, therefore, are consistent with the General Plan's Goals and Policies supporting high quality development. Public Notice This request was published in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 12, 2007, and mailed to all affected property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project site as required by Section 9.200.110 of the Zoning Code. To date, no letters have been received. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to recommend approval of this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolutions. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007-_, recommending a Negative Declaration of environmental impact be adopted for Environmental Assessment 2006-578 to the City Council. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007- recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2006-109. 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change 2006-086. Attachments: 1. Area Map — Properties Unentitled 10 acres 2. June 6, 2006 City Council Report and Meeting Minutes Prepared Planning Manager PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-109 AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2006-086 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-578 CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the. City of La Quinta, California, did on the 24" day of April, 2007, and continued hearing on the 8" of May, 2007, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for review of a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Ordinance Amendment to consider changes in policies and standards associated with the southeast portion of the City, relating to the design of small subdivisions; and WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending to the City Council certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed applications will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2006-578. 2. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish, or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The changes to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance will have no impact on biological or paleontological resources. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed amendments will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. No development is contemplated as a result of the amendments, and further environmental review will be undertaken when a development project is proposed. 4. The proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as the proposed project supports the long term goals of the General Plan by Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Environmental Assessment 2006-578 City of La Quinta Adopted: providing a variety of housing opportunities for City residents. No significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed amendments will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed amendments. 6. The proposed amendments will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly. The proposed amendments do not have the potential to adversely affect human beings, as no development is proposed. 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the amendments may have a significant effect on the environment. 8. The Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2006- 578 and said Environmental Assessment reflects the independent judgment of the City. 9. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2006-578 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist, attached and on file in the Community Development Department. 3. That Environmental Assessment 2006-578 reflects the independent judgment of the City. Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Environmental Assessment 2006-578 City of La Quinta Adopted: PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8`" day of May, 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: Douglas R. Evans Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-109, ADDING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY LOT SUBDIVISIONS ON PARCELS OF 10 ACRES OR LESS IN THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE CITY CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2006-109 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 241" of April, and continued hearing on the 8`" of May, 2007, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for review of policies and programs relating to the development of single family lot subdivisions on parcels of 10 acres or less in the southeastern portion of the City; and , WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2006-578 for this General Plan Amendment in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The Community Development Director has determined that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, is recommending that a Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 12, 2007, as prescribed by the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said General Plan Amendment: 1. The General Plan Amendment, as proposed is consistent with the General Plan, insofar as it will provide for the development of housing for future residents. Planning Commission Resolution 2007-_ General Plan Amendment 2006-109 City of La.Quinta April 24, 2007 2. Approval of the amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and will assure the orderly development of infill small parcels in the southeast portion of the City. 3. The new policies and programs are compatible with the existing policies and programs in the General Plan, insofar as the General Plan promotes and supports high quality single family development. 4. The changes are appropriate for this area of the City, insofar as the development of smaller parcels with adequate open space and roadway access in this area of the City should be compatible with existing less dense development in the area. 5. The continued development of the City requires the continued analysis of current conditions, and this General Plan amendment reflects these conditions and accommodates for future growth within the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 2006-109, adding policies and programs to the General Plan relating to the development of parcels of 10 acres or less in the southeastern portion of the City. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 81h day of May, 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Resolution 2007-_ General Plan Amendment 2006-109 City of La Quinta April 24, 2007 ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director City of La Quinta PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 2006-086, TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ADDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SINGLE FAMILY LOT SUBDIVISIONS ON LOTS OF 10 ACRES OR LESS IN THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE CITY CASE NO.: ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 2006-086 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the .City, of La Quinta, California, did on the 24' day of April, 2007, and continued hearing on the 8" of May, 2007, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for review of zoning text amendments to set standards for the development of single family lot subdivisions on lots of 10 acres or less in the southeast portion of the City; and WHEREAS, said Zone Text Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in'that the La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2006-578 for this Zone Text Amendment in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The Community Development Director has determined that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, is recommending that a Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), statutes.; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 12, 2007, as prescribed by the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing; upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Zone Text Amendment: 1. The proposed Zone Text Amendment is consistent with General Plan Amendment 2006-109, and implements policy set by that Planning Commission Resolution 2006-_ Zone Change 2006-086 City of La Quints April 24, 2006 Amendment for the development of smaller parcels in the southeast portion of the City. 2. Approval .of the Zone Text Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and will assure the development of single family subdivisions with adequate development standards. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED :by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Zone Text Amendment 2006-086, adding development standards for single family lot subdivisions on lots of 10 acres 'or less, to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 8t' day of May, 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director City of La Quinta N wtheast Area:. Unentitled and <_ 10 acres in size W F s ATTACHMENT #2 5 �Fk OF TES 9 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: June 6, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Land Use and Development Policies for the Southern Section of La Quinta RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Provide staff with specific policy direction regarding density and development incentives in the southern section of La Quinta. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: IN" CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Recent single-family development proposals in the southern section of La Quinta have primarily consisted of small projects on "infill lots." The requests have proposed maximum density with property size and/or configuration, limiting the opportunity for better circulation and access, overall design, and the possibility of incorporating other elements/features such as trails, open space and recreational amenities. As identified at the joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting, there are a limited number of properties remaining in this segment of the City that are not already entitled for future residential development (Attachment 1). Most of the un-entitled vacant properties identified are within Section 5 or within an area currently proposed by the Coachella Valley Water District for recharge ponds (south of Avenue 60 and west of Madison Street) (Attachment 2). Properties not included in these two areas are primarily grouped into four areas. 01 SACityMgISTAFF REPORTS ONLY\B 8 Land Use.dm Based upon recent City Council discussion and direction, staff has reviewed the City's General Plan policies and applicable development regulations in order to find ways to promote and encourage consolidation of small properties and subdivision densities appropriate to this segment of the community. The following represents two key policy points for consideration and discussion: Project Size. Most of the un-entitled vacant properties in the southern section are less than 20 acres in size and have separate individual owners. The zoning for all of these properties is low density residential (RL), which provides for a density of up to four units per acre. In an effort to encourage consolidation of these smaller, individually owned parcels, it is recommended that a maximum density of two units per acre be established for subdivisions less than ten acres in size. Project Design Primarily due to lot configuration, several of the recently proposed projects comprise a design limited to one cul-de-sac street. This is most prevalent on the north side of Avenue 58, west of Madison Street, where most of the existing and entitled projects are designed this way with no provisions for vehicular or even pedestrian connections between projects. Consolidation of properties coupled with encouraging access between developments could minimize the potential for a similar situation occurring on the remaining un-entitled vacant properties. It is recommended that consideration be given to requiring joint access provisions between adjacent un-entitled projects, particularly subdivisions less than ten acres in size. Joint access was approved for the Standard Pacific project which combined access of two tracts (TT 33336 and 32279) to Avenue 58 (Attachment. 3). In addition to access and circulation, it is difficult to incorporate quality of life features into small developments. Walking trails; open space, recreational amenities, etc. are virtually non-existent within projects less than ten acres in size. Yet these features can be essential quality of life components of developments with densities greater than two units per acre. It is recommended that maximum density allowances of up to four units per acre be encouraged for projects greater than ten acres in size that incorporate quality of life features such as walking trails, open space, and/or recreational amenities. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the Council include: 1. Direct staff to prepare General Plan and Zoning Amendments that encourage subdivisions with total acreage greater than 10 acres, good traffic circulation and access, good overall subdivision design, as well as "quality of life" amenities and features; or S:\CityMgASTAFT REPORTS ONMB 8 land Use.dw City Council Minutes 22 June 6, 2006 Council tooka brief recess, and reconvened at 10:24 with Mayor Adolph absent due to illness. 8. CONSIDERATION OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTION OF LA QUINTA. Planning Manager Johnson presented the staff report. In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr.. Johnson confirmed subdivisions less than 10 acres would have a maximum density of 2 units per acre, and 'subdivisions 10 acres and above would be allowed up to 4 units per acre. The intent is to encourage consolidation of properties and larger development proposals. Council Member Henderson asked if there would be any leeway in the policy to allow 3 units per. acre in subdivisions under 10 acres or would specific plans be used to allow for density bonuses. Community Development Director Evans indicated a zoning overlay may be necessary, and the policy will let developers . know what Council's expectations are. He added staff will do a general plan and zoning evaluation, and bring back a policy for Council adoption. Council Member Henderson asked about zoning and general plan changes for the Vista Santa Rosa area being done at the same time. Mr. Evans stated this is a smaller geographic area and not as complex in the analysis. It is,a parallel study but they may have different timeframes. Council Member Henderson spoke in support of staff's recommendation. She feels they -are good policy directions to be used anywhere in the sphere of influence area. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Osborne/Henderson to direct staff to prepare General Plan and Zoning Amendments that encourage subdivisions with total acreage greater than 10 acres, good traffic circulation and access, .good overall subdivision design, and "quality of life" amenities and features'. Council Member Osborne clarified it also includes 2 units per acre for subdivisions under 10 acres. City Council Minutes 23 June 6, 2006 Council Member Kirk stated he agrees the policy makes sense in the Vista Santa Rosa area, and indicated he supports this type of encouragement of better land use planning as part of consideration of land use in the Vista Santa Rosa area. Motion carried with Mayor Adolph ABSENT. STUDY SESSION — None REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Animal Campus Commission Council Member Henderson reported on an animal cruelty case wherein a number of animals had to be euthanized. CVAG Human & Community Resources Committee — Council Member Osborne stated they will be forming a subcommittee to work on the homeless issue. League of California Cities — Council Member Henderson reported the telecommunications issue has passed out of the Senate without any consideration of the League's input. She feels the proposed legislation is not "friendly" to cities. She indicated the League is also taking a strong position to assist in the "Cities for Healthy Kids" program. Riverside County Desert Library Zone Advisory Board — Council Member Henderson reported new technology is being utilized wherein students will be able to log onto live homework help at the Riverside County Library System web page. Riverside County Transportation Commission — Council Member Henderson stated funding from the Federal government and some major water districts will provide for four to six core drilling sites to establish if geology will support a proposed tunnel between Temecula and Orange County. San Jacinto/Santa Rosa National Monument Advisory Committee — Council Member Henderson reported they have requested reconsideration of a ban on hang- gliding in the Monument. They also have approved signs for the cities to purchase and post at the Monument boundaries. SilverRock Subcommittee — Council Member Osborne stated Landmark plans to put decomposed granite in the natural areas. They have also received a final report from the PGA Tour, and will be providing an official response to the City. 2. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, 7 Douglas vans Community Development Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese City Manager Attachment: 1. Area Map 2. CVWD Recharge Area Map 3. Standard Pacific Tract Map 03 a� o OF INTENT TO SPEAK FORM I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC COMMENTS: RE: AGENDA ITEM NO.: _if RE: PUBLIC HEARING NO.: C RE: I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM AM IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ITEM WRITTEN COMMENTS: (Optional) PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE (3) MINUTES WHEN SPEAKING!! DATE: NAME: QtgV1,0 71fKWk— ADDRESS: �� �BD AW7&%�it, D21 I]E-, Ll/ QW I AQ79 , C4 9 Z zS3 RETURN THIS FORM TO THE RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE THE MEETING BEGINS. THE CHAIRMAN WILL CALL YOUR NAME AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK YOU! P:\CAROLYN\Planning Com\INTENT TO SPEAK FORM.doc